BANK OF BARODA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/11358/2021HC KeralaKLHC01030930202109 October 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court recorded the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Nagaraj Narayanan, stating that in view of the directions issued in W.P.(C).No. 18130/2020, the writ petition was not being pressed and that applications before the Income Tax Department would also not be pursued. Based on these submissions, the Court held that the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. There was no decision on the merits of the underlying dispute, and no specific issues related to the Income Tax Act were decided. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Bank of Baroda, represented by its Regional Manager, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The respondents included the Income Tax Department, various Income Tax Officers, and an individual named Kunhiraman P.K. The writ petition was filed challenging an order or action by the Income Tax Department. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the writ petition filed by the Bank of Baroda should be entertained. The petitioner, through its counsel, submitted that in view of directions issued by the High Court in a previous writ petition (W.P.(C).No. 18130/2020), the present writ petition was not being pressed. Furthermore, the petitioner stated that applications filed by them before the Income Tax Department would also not be pursued. The Income Tax Department's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The question for the Court was essentially whether to dismiss the petition based on the petitioner's submission that it was not being pressed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 17TH ASWINA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 11358 OF 2021 PETITIONER: BANK OF BARODA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, JOSE ANNEX, JOSE JUNCTION, MG ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 016. BY ADVS.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN (N-125)-18565 SAIJO HASSAN BENOJ C AUGUSTIN RAFEEK. V.K. P.PARVATHY MANAS P HAMEED RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER, MUMBAI REGION, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI – 400020. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR 680 001. 3 KUNHIRAMAN P.K, S/O. LATE T.K.R.K. NAIR, ‘REMYA’, CIVIL LINES ROAD, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR 680 003. 4 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR 680 001. 5 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), CIRCLE 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR 680 001. BY ADVS.PHILIP T.VARGHESE V.T.LITHA SHRUTHI SARA JACOB AMRUTHA RAMESH K.R.MONISHA NITYA R. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 11358 OF 2021 -2-

JUDGMENT Sri.Nagaraj Narayanan – learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that, in view of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C).No. 18130/2020, this writ petition is not being pressed; and further that the applications before the Income Tax Department, filed by his client, will also not be pursued.

Recording the afore submissions, this writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE akv

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →